The Truck Operator Union, Ferozepur V. The Income-tax Officer, Ferozepur

ITA 488/ASR/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 60688 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-06-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 31-05-2012
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 13-09-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R L CHHANALIA

Judgement Text

ITA NOS. 483 TO 485 & 288 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. B.P.JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.483(ASR)/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2008-09 PAN:AAAAT4254G THE TRUCK OPERATOR UNION, VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICE R, MULLANWALA, DISTT. FEROZEPUR. WARD III(2), FEROZE PUR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A. NO.484(ASR)/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2008-09 PAN:AAAJG0900B M/S. GURU RAM DASS TRUCK OPERATOR UNION, VS. THE IN COME TAX OFFICER, FEROZEPUR CANTT.. WARD III(2), FEROZEPUR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A. NO.485(ASR)/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2008-09 PAN:AAAAT4390E THE ABOHARTRUCK OPERATOR UNION, VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, ZIRA GATE, FEROZEPUR CITY. WARD III(1), FEROZEPU R. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A. NO.488 (ASR)/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2008-09 PAN:AAAAT4355J THE TRUCK OPERATOR UNION, VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICE R, MULLANWALA, DISTT. FEROZEPUR. WARD III(2), FEROZE PUR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANTS BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY:SH. R.L.CHHANALIA, DR 2 DATE OF HEARING :31/05/2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT:01/06/2012 ORDER PER BENCH: THESE FOUR APPEALS FILED BY DIFFERENT ASSESSEES ARE DIRECTED AGAINST SEPARATE IMPUGNED ORDERS OF THE CIT(A), BATHINDA, E ACH DATED 14.07.2011 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2. NOTICE OF HEARING WAS ISSUED TO ALL THE ASSESSEE S FOR 03.05.2012. IN RESPONSE TO THE SAME, SH. VARINDER MOHAN SINGHAL, C A, FILED AN APPLICATION REQUESTING FOR ADJOURNMENT ON THE GROUND THAT HE IS UNABLE TO ATTEND THE HEARING ON 03.05.2012 AND THE BENCH ADJOURNED THE C ASES FOR 31.05.2012 I.E. FOR TODAY AND THE NOTICES OF THE SAME WERE ALSO ISS UED BY RPAD TO ALL THE ASSESSEES. AGAIN VIDE APPLICATION DATED 24.05.2012, WHICH WAS RECEIVED BY THE BENCH ON 28.05.2012, SH. VARINDER MOHAN SINGHAL , CA, REQUESTED FOR ADJOURNMENT OF THE PRESENT APPEALS. 3. WE HAVE PERUSED THE APPEALS FILED AND FOUND THAT SH. VARINDER MOHAN SINGHAL, CA HAS NOT BEEN AUTHORIZED BY THE ASSESSEE S TO REPRESENT THE PRESENT APPEALS, AS WE HAVE NOT FOUND ANY AUTHORIZA TION AS REQUIRED UNDER SECTION 288 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. IN THE ABS ENCE OF ANY AUTHORIZATION, WE ARE UNABLE TO ACCEPT THE REQUEST OF THE LD. CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT, SH. VARINDER MOHAN SINGHAL. WE ARE ALSO OF THE VIEW THAT THIS 3 OFFICE HAS ISSUED NOTICES IN THESE FOUR APPEALS, W HICH COSTS MORE THAN RS.25/- PER NOTICE EXCLUDING THE PRECIOUS EXERCISE OF ITAT STAFF, WHO HAVE LOT OF WORK TO DO. 3.1. KEEPING IN VIEW THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASES EXPLAINED ABOVE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT NEITHER THE ASSESSEE S NOR THEIR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES ARE INTERESTED TO PROSECUTE THE MAT TER IN DISPUTE. THEREFORE, THE PRESENT APPEALS ARE DISMISSED IN LIMINE WITH TH E LIBERTY TO THE ASSESSEES, IF SO ADVISED, CAN MOVE APPLICATIONS FOR RECALLING OF THIS ORDER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, AFTER RECTIFYING THE DEFECTS POINTED OUT BY THE REGISTRY VIDE DEFECT MEMO DATED 22.09.2011 IN EACH CASE. ACCORDINGLY, AL L THE APPEALS ARE DISMISSED. 4. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE FOUR APPEALS OF THE ASSE SSEES ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1ST JUNE, 2012. SD/- SD/- (B.P. JAIN) (H.S. SIDHU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 1ST JUNE, 2012 /SKR/ COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. THE ASSESSEES: 2. THE ITO WARD III(2)/WARD III(1), FEROZEPUR. 3. THE CIT(A), BATHINDA. 4. THE CIT, BATHINDA. 5. THE SR DR, ITAT, AMRITSAR TRUE COPY BY ORDER